The Kat Von D Lawsuit – An Artist’s Perspective on Envy, Malice, and the Fight for Tattoo Art
- blackwidowtattoo2
- Oct 25
- 7 min read
Updated: Dec 9
As a 'small-fry' tattoo artist, slinging ink at the cripsy kritter end of the planet—Australia, to be precise. With over 25 years in the game across two countries, I’ve tattooed everything from Iron Maiden album covers to Metallica’s ninja star (at least 20 times, no less), full Marvel and Star Wars sleeves, and even Disney characters.
It’s what we do: we take a client’s passion, a 2D image, and transform it into a 3D masterpiece on skin that moves, breathes, and varies with texture, pigmentation, and genetics.
We charge for the transference—the skill, the sterile environment, the hours of labour—not the image itself.
It’s transferable fan art, a tribute, not a knock-off. Yet, here we are, watching Kat Von D, one of our industry’s brightest stars, get dragged through the courts over a single Miles Davis tattoo. And I can’t help but think: if a nobody like me had done that tattoo, the photographer suing her would’ve probably liked it, maybe even reposted it. So why is Kat in the crosshairs?
I’ll tell you why—jealousy, plain and simple. And it’s a disgrace that one artist would do this to another.
Tattoo Art Is Fan Art, Not Reproduction.
Tattooing isn’t reproduction—it’s transformation. When I ink a Metallica ninja star or a Black Widow-inspired Marvel sleeve (shoutout to my own brand), I’m not photocopying someone’s work. I’m reinterpreting it on a living canvas, factoring in skin’s quirks and the client’s vision.
We charge for the transference—the hours, the precision, the sterile setup—not the image. Clients ask for fan art because it’s personal, a tribute to what they love. I’ve done many popular genred tattoos, No one’s suing me, because it’s understood: this is fan art, not a factory churning out bootleg merch.
Yet Sedlik’s lawsuit treats Kat’s tattoo like a mass-produced product. It’s nonsense. Tattoos are one-offs, etched into one person’s skin, never to be replicated. When we post our work, it’s to show our style, our execution. That’s what gets the next job—not the fact that it’s a Miles Davis portrait or a Lady Gaga album cover. The well-done execution is the draw. Sedlik’s claim that Kat’s Instagram posts (with 85,000 likes) were “commercial” is a stretch. Every artist posts their work to attract clients—it’s how we survive. If that’s infringement, then every tattooist sharing a superhero or band logo is at risk.
The Double Standard: Big Business vs. Small Artists
The kicker? Big corporations get away with far worse. Here in Australia, walk into Big W, and you’ll see Metallica, Slayer, and Nirvana logos on T-shirts, mugs, and posters. I’d wager they don’t have licensing deals for every design, yet they’re raking in profits.
Meanwhile, a tattoo artist charges $60 for a one-time logo tattoo and faces a lawsuit? It’s a double standard. Retailers mass-produce fan art for profit, but small-fry artists like me—or even high-profile ones like Kat—get targeted for bespoke work that’s purely about the craft.
Sedlik’s not suing Big W for their unlicensed Nirvana tees. He’s going after Kat because her name makes headlines.
A Framework to Protect Tattoo Artists
This case is a wake-up call. Artists need to unite and create a framework to protect our rights. Tattoo art should be legally recognized as fan art, distinct from reproduction, and shielded from copyright lawsuits when it’s a one-off piece requested by a client. Here’s what that framework could look like:
Define Tattoo Art as Fan Art: Legally classify tattoos as transformative works under fair use, emphasizing the creative process of transferring a 2D image onto a 3D, living canvas.
Protect the Transference: Clarify that tattoo artists charge for their time, skill, and execution, not the image itself. A $60 tattoo isn’t profiting off someone’s copyright—it’s payment for labor.
Exempt Social Media Sharing: Posting a tattoo online to showcase style shouldn’t be deemed “commercial use.” It’s promotion of our craft-the execution, not the original image.
Limit Liability for One-Offs: Tattoos are singular creations, not mass-produced goods. Copyright law should reflect this distinction, protecting artists from claims over bespoke work at the request of clients.
Unite the Industry: Form a global coalition—call it the Artists Alliance—to advocate for these protections. We need a unified voice to push back against predatory lawsuits.
If Sedlik’s appeal succeeds, it could set a precedent that endangers every artist who’s ever inked a band logo or a movie character. From Brisbane to Berlin, we’d all be looking over our shoulders.
That’s why I’m standing with Kat. Her fight is our fight!
He’s not protecting his work; he’s trying to profit off her success.
Dear Kat Von D,
I’m Erika, a tattoo artist with over 23 years in the game, slinging ink in Australia and New Zealand. I ran Kustom Tattoo 7 Years n NZ, Black Widow (Creative) for just under 10 Years in Australia, (sadly, until last May 25, one month before a tenure), a small outfit born from my love for Marvel comics and the tattoo and airbrushed art of transformation—named after my favourite badass, Black Widow.
I’m a nobody compared to you — just another tattooist trying to make it. But every one of us has lived through that same unspoken truth… tattooing stories no one ever dares to question.
Until you start doing too well.
Then it turns ugly. The jealous ones crawl out, spinning fake stories about being hurt — not because you did anything wrong, but because they can’t stand to see you build a life they never had the guts to chase.
They don’t just come for your art. They come for your name. Your reputation. And in your case — your money too.
Your fight in this Sedlik v. Von Drachenberg lawsuit isn’t just yours—it’s ours.
And I’m writing to say:
Your courage is inspiring, but the toll this is taking on you breaks my heart. We (Tattooers) need to talk about what’s happening, why it’s so damn unfair, and how we can unite to protect our craft.
I read your Instagram post from a couple of days ago, this one, and I felt the pain of your crushed your passion for tattooing. As someone who’s inked everything, it hit me hard. I work in airbrushing also, again being paid for the transference of an image to a substrate other than skin... I have recreated Boris Vallejo and Julie Bell’s fantasy art, Betty Boop, and even liquor labels like Jack Daniel’s No. 7 onto motorcycles and cars via an airbrush, and many other ‘fan art’ requests, which fall in exactly the same context as tattoo art’s transference artwork services.
As ART Craft creatives; WE are ALL paid for the transference recreation of imagery chosen by our Clients.
Tattooing is our soul—it’s taking a 2D image and turning it into a 3D masterpiece on skin that’s got texture, pigmentation, and genetics all playing their part. It’s not copying; it’s transference, fan art created for clients who live for this stuff. We charge for the skill, the sterile setup, the hours—not the image. Yet here you are, fighting a photographer who’s trying to make your Miles Davis tattoo something it’s not.
Let’s call it what it is: Jeffrey Sedlik’s lawsuit is personal. If a small-fry like me, toiling away at the arse-end of the planet, had done that same tattoo, he’d probably have liked it, maybe even reposted it with a nod to his 1989 Jazziz photo. Why? Because I’m not Kat Von D, with 7 million followers, a global brand, and High Voltage Tattoo. This isn’t about copyright—it’s about jealousy and fame. Sedlik (Photographer) saw your fame, your wealth, your reputation, and thought, “Here’s my shot.” It’s malicious, vexatious, and downright disgraceful, especially from one artist to another. We’re supposed to lift each other up, not tear each other down. He should be held accountable for dragging you through this, especially after you won the jury trial in January 2024, proving the tattoo wasn’t substantially similar and fell under fair use. Now, with the appeal in the Ninth Circuit (heard July 17, 2025, still pending), he’s doubling down, and it’s killing you—and our industry.
Let’s get one thing straight — a photograph is just a snapshot of existence. Yeah, there are rules about ownership and usage, but don’t twist it. A photo isn’t a creation or a recreation born from hours of grind, skill, and soul — it’s a single moment someone caught, not crafted.
Why? Because your name makes headlines. (I’m still doing the same—using your notoriety, but for a good cause, for an alliance. Still doing it, still leveraging the power, just on the right side this time).
It’s not fair, Kat. Sedlik’s not going after corporation’s like ‘Big W’ here in Australia, where they slap Metallica, and Nirvana logos on T-shirts without a care—without licenses for re-sale. But you, creating a one-off tattoo for a friend, posting it to show your craft? (The execution of art onto skin). You’re the target.
It’s a double standard, and it’s utter bullshit.
If Sedlik’s appeal wins, it could set a precedent that screws every artist who’s ever inked a band logo or a superhero. From Brisbane to LA, we’d be dodging lawsuits for doing what clients ask of us. (Providing a service – go figure).
We must unite as artists to create a framework that protects tattooing or any craft recreation as ‘fan art’ where the charge is once only for the execution of the recreated image onto the substrate, be it skin, steel, wool or wood.
We need to push for laws that recognize tattoos and all crafts as transformative works, charged for the transference procedure, not the image. Social media posts shouldn’t be “commercial use”—they’re our portfolio, you cannot get a job without an account demonstrating your own work as an artist...
One-off tattoos aren’t mass-produced merch. We all need to fight for this, globally.
Kat, you’re not alone. I’m standing with you.
You’ve inspired me, not just with your art but with your fight. I know this lawsuit has taken so much from you, but don’t let it take your tattoo spark. The industry needs you—your talent, your voice, your fire.
This is my statement. 18th August 2025.
With full honour,
Artist: Erika B. Armstrong
Tattooing as an Allrounder Artist
Australia / New Zealand.
